June 17, 2011

That sounded like a great string of words, but then I realized I couldn't grasp the concept. I had to say it out loud. Victim. I get it. Weiner is the victim. Okay. Web-driven macho partisan cocooning. Web-driven partisan cocooning I would get. But what was macho about it? Didn't Weiner leave when he got double-teamed by Nancy and Debbie. And then Obama stuck his toe in and said what he would do if it were him. That wasn't macho. Then a porn star delivered the final blow. Maybe that was macho.

But, reading on, I see that the cocoon Mickey is talking about is Weiner's lefty friends on the web, including Daily Kos people and the lady-fans Weiner found on-line. They made him feel so powerful that he made mistakes. But I'm back to the same question. What's macho about that? Kaus thinks that Weiner thought that the lefty bloggers would fight for him. And that's macho... why?

Sorry. A middle-aged politician sitting at home masturbating because young women thought he was cool when he yelled at that guy that one time is not macho. And it doesn't get more macho because he's counting on lefty dweebs with blogs to type out a defense for you.

Au contraire, Ann, didn't you read some of the adoring comments from the young debutants he was exchanging tweets with? They LUUVVED his "macho" shouting and posturing on TV and on C-span on the floor of the House. Most were lefty types who were activelyURGING him on to do more of it! It WAS a cocoon--an echo chamber of like-minded groupies/group-thinkers all into the macho confrontational style of political theater

What I find most interesting about the story is how the floodgates opened so quickly after the first cracks appeared. It turned out that there were many compromising pictures and messages out there, but they were sitting idly on a numerous hard drives. If they had continued to remain on those hard drives, this story would not have had legs. But for some reason the net friends of Weiner decided that they needed to share what they had with the public. Why? And could something similar ever happen to Obama? There is a lot of compromising information about his past out there, kept under wraps by his former colleagues and friends–stuff that the press did not want to investigate or report in 2008. Are there any circumstances that would prompt this information to suddenly be shared?

"having a strong or exaggerated sense of power or the right to dominate." (online dictionary)

or

"Macho is mostly a word of Spanish and Portuguese origin that describes a person, usually a man, with an attitude of being overtly masculine and virile, displaying manly characteristics, such as domineering, fierceness, bravado, chauvinism, etc., in ways that are showily and histrionically tough."(Wikipedia)

"Attitude" and "exaggerated sense" suggest that macho may be in the subject's head, rather than a fact.

What I find most interesting about the story is how the floodgates opened so quickly after the first cracks appeared. It turned out that there were many compromising pictures and messages out there, but they were sitting idly on a numerous hard drives. If they had continued to remain on those hard drives, this story would not have had legs. But for some reason the net friends of Weiner decided that they needed to share what they had with the public.

Not sure what's ticking you off, Ann. Macho is a negative term, meaning the worst aspects of being alpha male. Nor is this a "defense of him". Kaus was clearly describing a Cautionary Tale. Nor do I see why he deserves to be called a dweeb for it.

Wiener's on par with a flasher, sans the raincoat. But with a BlackBerry. Taking picktures of "himself" in the House gym. Where there are signs posted: NO CAMERAS. Even House Members aren't allowed to use cameras.

Besides. Who wants perverts elected?

And, separate from the first "man in the gray underpants," there was a shot of this lunatic. On the House floor. Screaming. Spittle flying. Because republicans didn't want to vote for his communist manifesto bill. And, he's standing their shouting: "No, I will not yield! The gentlemen will sit down."

Making sound bytes for TV is not a reason to keep this dreck in Congress, after he has crossed the line.

Now. He has Four to Five Million Dollars in his "kitty." Which he got from contributions. Which he can keep. That's what took 3 weeks of "negotiations" ... before he left.

And, yeah. Per the story, the fetus still hangs in there. While Huma doesn't look pregnant. (So she must have great hips.)

Winston Churchill once said that all young men think with their hearts. Then, with experiences under their belts. Reality. And, aging. They grow conservative. Everyone.

In today's world? The old ones who were once at Woodstock are much more conservative. While they fear not only losing Medicare, and Social Security. They see the values of their homes rotted away. And, faith in their portfolios ... quietly earned through 401-K's, having vanished.

Weiner constituents would have voted him into office again. Know why because they are just as fucked up New York garbage as he is. He reflected their toothless barks as a function of bravdo to become a means of representing them in congress. He let it get to his head. Which one? Both and a total fail. Suckered again, yeah Crooklyn/Queens?

Macho is a negative term, meaning the worst aspects of being alpha male.

Was it always? We have a wide range of ages commenting here regularly. Seems like, in my wee days, that macho was a positive thing. Or what that only a gay thing promoted by the Village People? I had the double-live album, but at 8, didn't realize they were gay or even what gay was.

Winston Churchill once said that all young men think with their hearts. Then, with experiences under their belts. Reality. And, aging. They grow conservative. Everyone.

In today's world? The old ones who were once at Woodstock are much more conservative. While they fear not only losing Medicare, and Social Security. They see the values of their homes rotted away. And, faith in their portfolios ... quietly earned through 401-K's, having vanished.

Carol, I think you're saying something that has intrigued me for a long time; Liberals these days are the ones defending the status quo and conservatives are the radical, revolutionary ones. The pendulum has swung so far that it has flipped. Of course, I suppose that conservatives now are actually small-el, classical liberals and big-el Liberals are really nothing but warmed-over communists and useful idiots.

Abso-floggin-lutely. The positive aspects of "macho", to me at least, are the same as the aspects of "cool". You are, or you're not. Trying to be so only makes you less so. Your actions and bearing speak for themselves.

I, myself, rank very high on the funk-o-meter, right around 110 megafonzies. I've never done an M-scan, so I don't where I am on the Hemmingway scale.

OK, people lie about sex, but not everyone believes their lies. What's annoying about the Weiner affair, is not that he lied but that so many people believed those obvious lies.....The left has never examined their own credulity, nor the facility with which their leaders fabricate martyrdom.....Right now, the left is saying it's time to move on, to move past this meaningless kerfuffle. But that's the problem. The sins of capitalism, the prejudices of the bourgeoise. the hysteria of anti-Commuists, etc: all these are examined in loving detail. We never move past them. However, the mendacity, delusions, and credulity of the left are never considered in their Zinn analysis of history. How is it possible that millions of people thought that a low life like Sacco was a visionary and a towering figure like Oliver Wendell Holmes was a simple bigot. Why did John Reed accept cash from the Soviet Union to violently overthrow the United States. How did it come to pass that the Rosenbergs thought that the United States was a more anti-Semitic country than the USSR? Why did Alger Hiss leave his children a legacy of lies to defend even now?....There is no one on the Kos left to even consider these questions. Weiner was not deceiving them; he was lying to the Republicans in furtherance of the higher, greater Truth.

1) His story was tissue thin and it was laughably easy to prove he was lying through is fucking teeth. Since there is no privacy on the internet thanks to Congress, everything was traceable right back to his IP address at his home in New York. They want to spy on us? OK, we'll spy back on them. How you like us now assholes?

2) He's an asshole.

3) Because he's an asshole, he made a lot of enemies in the media on his way up. Nobody really liked him.

4) He must have really pissed off Dana Bash at some point because she simply eviscerated him live on the steps of the Capital. Thanks should go to her producer too (unfortunately, I don't know his name). They totally refused to allow him to filibuster - claiming he had already answered questions when he had not.

5) He's a fucking skeevy pervert. People who like to whip their cocks out and show them to young girls on the internet are not defensible. No other politician could say "Hey, we've all done that." They probably all have, but they can't ADMIT they have.

6) Lots of unemployed people have a lot of time on their hands to do nothing but follow Congressmen to break up the boredom of their days. It's a game. See which Democrat we can destroy next. It's fun. Hey, we'd rather have good-paying jobs, of course. Then we wouldn't have time to destroy Democrats. Know what I mean?

7) It's now possible to force these issues onto the front page of reluctant liberal newspapers by using the comment sections of those very newspapers. Also blog comment sections are the tail wagging the dog driving water cooler conversation.

8) Summertime is slow news time. Congress wasn't in session so there wasn't a lot else that was occupying the time of Washington and New York reporters. They had time to extract their revenge on Flashy Tony for being such an insufferable fucking prick.

9) His trophy wife; Bill Clinton presiding over the wedding, at a castle. She working for Hillary. I mean, the ironies were just endless.

10) Weiner? A flasher? Whodathunkit? I mean, come on. You can't make this shit up.

The "macho" was the embrace of smashmouth, cable-newsy politics. Commenter above calls it "shouty", which is a very exact term that I hope catches on. It's "macho" relative to the bloodless punching-baggery of an Alan Colmes.

I don't even know that it's politics so much as theater. Politics aims at getting elected or getting laws passed, and/or changing opinion on an issue. Comparing Newt Gingrich "the smartest GOP Prez candiate" to the "#tallestmidget" doesn't do that. "Shouty"ness aims at entertaining your audience, with the feedback effect of growing your audience.

Again, I see Weiner's resume and skills as designed for cable news, staking a claim to Keith Olbermann's vacant throne.

But it seems macho to the lefties and the women. His power with the lefties was all an illusion anyway, so it was easy to pretend that he's a real tough guy, because he yelled at that Rethuglican that one time and like, totally pwned him. LOLZ.

That we did, t-man. And yeeeuuup, those are people who are not only NOT really facing challengers, but not really facing challenges either. I was once outnumbered by people who attempted - to my face - to make me feel like the sense of manhood I came up with was wrong, and worthy of defeat, physical or otherwise. (You've heard the joke about "you and what army?" I knew what army.) My reaction - The Macho Response - was "Oh yeah?"

And that wasn't posturing. You guys, over the internet, have a better sense of me than most. You know I can be hurt, that I can cry, that I can be - and will admit to being - wrong. But, also, that I try to be fair and won't back down when I'm in the right. Shit, I'd been stripped of everything by those people but they weren't going to beat ME. As Scott said, "You are, or you're not."

[W]hether Weiner survives is hardly important. Of more consequence is what’s driving all these men (and the occasional woman) to reckless behavior.

Some apologists claim these men simply have more testosterone, and greater libido, than the general population. More likely, it’s the same thing that is causing many more of their colleagues to engage in reckless behavior in their professional lives: a sense of invincibility.

Maybe when Kaus says "macho," he means what Milbank describes as "a sense of invincibility." Which isn't such a big stretch, IMO.

"And, separate from the first 'man in the gray underpants,' there was a shot of this lunatic. On the House floor. Screaming. Spittle flying. Because republicans didn't want to vote for his communist manifesto bill. And, he's standing there shouting: 'No, I will not yield! The gentlemen will sit down.'"

As I seemingly never tire of saying, the real story isn't Weiner's downfall, but rather that he had any political clout to begin with. How-in-the-world did this rude, developmentally arrested schmuck become the spokesman for the Democratic left?

Wake up, will ya, pal? If you're not inside, you're outside, okay? And I'm not talking a $400,000 a year working Wall Street stiff flying first class and being comfortable, I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars, buddy. A player, or nothing. Now, you had what it took to get into my office; the real question is whether you got what it takes to stay.

In my environs a fellow who acted "macho" as exemplified by Mr. Weiner Boy's recorded rants would quickly be looking up from the floor. His behavior was not macho, it was posturing, preening and bullying because he knew helpers would intervene if the issue were joined. Had he done it in an uncontrolled situation I'd have called him macho, very stupid and a man with little imagination and life experience.

Have you seen a video like this, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcNvHqR3O_k. Call it "The Resignation".

It is a Hollywood movie:- The pol. begins to resign, with flashbacks, the rowdy crowd, etc.- It will be a sell-out.- Somebody shouts: Bye-bye pervert. - Senator Weiner, what is this? Does the guy not know the House from Senate?